Who is Huohuade Lutenike? The Chinese rendition of Howard Lutnick, the billionaire nominated to lead the US Commerce Department, is not well known in China. But that may eventually take shape US trade policiesEver since Donald Trump announced his choice, Chinese investors and policy-watchers have been clamoring for information. More than anything they want to know whether Mr. Lutenike would slap Mr. Trump’s proposed 60% tariff on all Chinese imports. The urgency of such efforts has increased since the President-elect launched an initial attack on November 25, announcing that he would start with an additional 10% tariff on Chinese goods from his first day in office – a figure that is expected to increase. is likely to.

Other nominees are considered better. Incoming Secretary of State Marco Rubio has tried to force Chinese companies to delist from U.S. stock exchanges and impose sanctions on him in response to his helping Chinese officials as a senator. Mr Trump’s choice for national security adviser, Mike Waltz, boycotted the Beijing Winter Olympics. New Trade Representative Jameson Greer was the architect of Mr Trump’s first trade war with China.

in the face of such arroganceChinese officials have maintained silence. But the formula for trade talks has started emerging in the country. China’s leader Xi Jinping set out “red lines” in a meeting with President Joe Biden on November 16. The essence was that the Communist Party’s rule and China’s claim on Taiwan should not become a bargaining chip in the talks. Then on December 1, the tax exemption on aluminum and copper ended. Prices of battery and photovoltaic products fell from 13% to 9%. This is an amazing change. Last year, China rejected claims that it was exporting batteries and solar products at artificially low prices. Martin Linge Rasmussen of Exante Data, a research firm, says the discount cuts are the first time authorities have taken action to reduce the strength of such charges. Analysts at broker Sinolink Securities call it a “pre-emptive strike.”

At the same time, Chinese officials want to increase trade with the rest of the world. The Commerce Ministry said on November 19 that it would promote export credit and insurance and support logistics services for Chinese companies. The ministry wants to increase the number of countries from which short-term business visas can be granted. It has promised to help companies respond if “unfair foreign-trade restrictions” arise. This month it will remove tariffs on imports from some of the world’s poorest countries.

Mr Trump could target companies that help Chinese companies assemble or reship goods to third countries. For example, solar companies have set up factories in Indonesia and Laos to circumvent US tariffs on exports passing through Mexico and Vietnam. To help small businesses sell goods overseas through e-commerce platforms, Chinese local governments have set up service centers. Shanghai is setting up a “Silk Road e-commerce pilot zone” to facilitate trade with Central Asia.

The tariff workaround means existing US measures have not prevented China from increasing exports. Since the start of Mr Trump’s trade war in 2018, China’s trade surplus has more than doubled to $820bn (or 6% of GDP). Its surplus with the US remains at $340bn, roughly the same as in 2018. If Mr Trump is willing to strike a deal including limited increases in tariffs, his measures could lead to a manageable 0.4 percentage point reduction in annual Chinese GDP growth between 2027 and 2029. According to Oxford Economics, a research firm. CF40 Research, a Beijing-based think-tank, estimates that “moderate” tariffs of 10-20% would slow China’s year-on-year export growth to 1.5% next year, with no tariffs below 2.2%. Mr Trump’s promised 60% tariff hike could reduce exports by 6.5% next year, which would have a devastating effect.

Will China oppose tit-for-tat retaliation? During the first phase of the trade war, officials responded to the tariffs by imposing similar penalties on U.S. imports. This strategy was ineffective because the US is much less dependent on Chinese demand than other methods. Some expect China to allow its currency to devalue against the dollar. Although doing so would make its goods more affordable, a large decline in the yuan risks draining capital.

Instead, Chinese trade experts expect the government to focus on domestic policies as a means to counter US pressure. Lian Ping, an influential economist, has recommended that China boost wages and consumer demand to fortify itself against US economic attacks. He wrote, “Only when your body is strong and healthy can you withstand external attacks.” This could be part of China’s plan. The government has promised stimulus to improve the gloomy sentiment affecting the Chinese economy. Bankers in Shanghai quipped they were celebrating Trump’s victory in anticipation of more government spending.

business concerns

There is more to the President-elect’s China policy than tariffs. The US and China are still in the middle of a tech war that was started by Mr Trump, escalated by Mr Biden and shows no signs of stopping. Mr Biden has attempted to cut China off from inputs needed for advanced technology such as artificial-intelligence chips. Hundreds of Chinese companies have been added to the Commerce Department’s list of entities, restricting US transactions with them. In October the Treasury imposed a sweeping investment-control regime that would block most U.S. investments in Chinese AI, semiconductors and quantum computing. The Biden administration is believed to be drafting a definition of what types of AI chips companies can sell to China. Mr. Trump can make it much stricter.

Chinese companies may also soon be subject to sanctions from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which, unlike the Commerce Department’s list of entities, restricts their ability to use dollars. Imposing OFAC sanctions on a Chinese bank would prevent dollar transactions with other banks and possibly lead to its collapse. A former US trade official says they have been used rarely until now, but the nominations of Messrs. Rubio and Waltz suggest such measures may become more common.

China’s ability to defend against attacks is limited. Authorities have invested tens of billions of dollars in the semiconductor industry in an effort to make China self-reliant. Although it has shown progress, especially in chip-making machines, the country still does not make the most powerful chips and sources less than 15% of its chips domestically. China also depends on the dollar-based financial system. Transactions in yuan have increased over the past two years, but most still use Swift, a messaging network that is vulnerable to US influence.

Mr Xi would likely retaliate if such drastic action was taken or his red lines were crossed. For example, on December 1, China implemented new dual-use export-control rules, creating a list of military-use items that face export restrictions. Over time, China could use these to restrict exports of minerals needed for high-tech gear, such as gallium and germanium, where it dominates production. To increase pressure, Chinese regulators could identify other goods whose exports they could block without affecting domestic industries. Some antibody precursors that are used by pharmaceutical companies come particularly from China and may make good candidates.

Chinese regulators have been keen to highlight the harm this is causing. Last month China used a new tool, the foreign anti-sanctions law, to bar Skydio, America’s biggest drone maker, from selling Chinese batteries because it sells batteries to Taiwan. This law could be used to deprive dozens of American companies of the Chinese-made components they rely on. American companies may also face setbacks in China. In October an industry body called for an investigation into Intel, a US tech company, due to alleged security vulnerabilities in its chips.

China’s Commerce Ministry recently used its “unreliable entities” list to investigate PVH, the US owner of brands such as Tommy Hilfiger, because it complied with the US Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which requires companies to export their products from Xinjiang. There is a need to stop using cotton. The original bill was sponsored by Mr. Rubio. With him as Secretary of State, it is easy to see the possibility of many more skirmishes and possibly complete disregard for China’s red lines. Mr Xi is ready to talk with Mr Trump on trade. Anything beyond that runs the risk of getting out of control very quickly.

For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up money TalksOur weekly subscriber-only newsletter.

Excerpts from recent editorials in the United States and abroad:

Dec. 6

The Washington Post on the Senate and a shrinking window to protect press freedom

In 2021, Attorney General Merrick Garland established new, but long-needed, press protections barring federal prosecutors from pursuing journalists’ communication records with confidential sources except in extreme circumstances. But these protections are only as good as the administration controlling the Justice Department.

President-elect Donald Trump, who has espoused hostility toward journalists and seeks to elevate people who share this feeling to powerful positions in government, is weeks away from taking over federal law enforcement agencies. In other words, Congress has little time left to codify Mr. Garland’s policy into law. The Senate can — and should — do that in the lame-duck session.

In January, the House of Representatives passed such a bill without opposition. The legislation — the Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying Act, or Press Act — would prevent the federal government from using legal tools such as subpoenas and search warrants to go after reporters’ information, except in cases where doing so would prevent violence or terrorism. The measure would also bar prosecutors from demanding that third parties, such as phone companies or internet providers, hand over journalists’ data.

That legislation has since languished in the Senate, but a spokesperson for Sen. Charles E. Schumer said the majority leader supports the bill and intends to pass it next week. Senators could attach it to the must-pass National Defense Authorization Act, which lawmakers are negotiating now. Two conservative Republicans — Lindsey Graham and Mike Lee — already support the bill, and there are probably a few others who would like to see it pass, given the broad bipartisan support it has enjoyed in previous years.

The trouble, however, is Mr. Trump. Last month, he posted an all-caps demand on Truth Social that Republicans “KILL” the bill. Although his decision to weigh in on the legislation was unexpected, his opposition is unsurprising, given his first administration’s efforts to root out government leakers by obtaining the phone and email records of reporters at multiple outlets, including The Post. His Justice Department even obtained a gag order preventing executives at the New York Times from informing editors at the paper that the government was seeking the email logs of four reporters to uncover their sources.

The president-elect’s social media missive makes it less likely that Republican senators who support the measure will back it now, but they should keep in mind that this is not a partisan issue. Administrations from both parties have pursued journalists’ sources in recent years, including the Obama Justice Department, which seized phone records of the Associated Press in 2013 and conducted electronic surveillance of Fox News’s James Rosen in an aggressive attempt to expose leakers.

Such overreach disserves the public, regardless of whether it happens under a Democratic or Republican president. Confidential sources have been critical to exposing government abuses, such as the CIA’s waterboarding of al-Qaeda prisoners. One Pulitzer Prize-winning report from Mississippi Today’s Anna Wolfe relied on confidential sources to uncover the misuse of welfare funds in the state; now she and her editor face a court order to give up their sources or risk jail time. If journalists cannot protect their sources’ identities, whistleblowers might be unwilling to reveal information the public deserves to know.

Critics of the bill, such as Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton , contend that it would encourage more government leaks, potentially damaging national security. But over the past few years, Mr. Garland’srules do not appear to have increased controversial leaks or damaged national security.

Meanwhile, the need to protect journalists is as clear as ever. Kash Patel, whom Mr. Trump has chosen to replace Christopher A. Wray as FBI director, has said he would “come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections.” He added, “Whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out.”

State and federal government accountability systems are more developed than they used to be, but they still often fall short. When they do, responsible media remain essential outlets for whistleblowers and other public-spirited individuals seeking to expose official wrongdoing. That will be true under Mr. Trump, but also under the next Democratic president. Mr. Schumer should stay firm in his stated intention to advance the Press Act before this Congress’s session ends — and the Republicans who understand its merits should support it. ONLINE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/12/06/press-act-senate-schumer-journalism-garland/

Dec. 6

The New York Post on food insecurity in the US

It is an astonishingly large number: 5.3 billion. That’s how many meals were distributed by the nation’s largest domestic hunger relief organization, Feeding America, in 2023 alone. In a country of more than 330 million people, it is evidence of how widespread and persistent food insecurity remains in the United States.

Food insecurity is defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as the lack of access to enough food for an active and healthy life. More than 13 percent of Americans — 47 million people — experienced food insecurity in 2023; the rates are even higher in Black and Latino communities. In some of the poorest regions of America, mostly rural areas in the South, food insecurity among children is as high as 48 percent. But it is present in every county in the country.

While lawmakers in local, state and federal government struggle to find long-term solutions, Feeding America, a network of roughly 200 food banks and 60,000 food pantries and meal programs, is filling the void every day for tens of millions of Americans. It is one of the organizations supported by The New York Times Communities Fund.

Feeding America needs help to continue this essential frontline work. The average cost of a single meal may be only $3.99, but when that is multiplied by the millions of meals required, it adds up to $33 billion that families need and don’t have for groceries. After a temporary boost during the Covid pandemic, food donations and government funding have fallen off sharply, even as the demand remains steady.

Some of that demand is a lingering effect of the inflation that peaked in 2022, but some food costs are still stubbornly high.

Another problem is that nearly half of Americans who are food insecure are unlikely to qualify for federal programs like SN because many have incomes that are too high to be eligible. Most families of four that receive SN benefits have incomes below $40,560. Feeding America estimates that that leaves around 20 million people in a no man’s land, where they can neither afford sufficient food nor qualify for help to pay for it.

Racial disparities are also striking. Nationwide, roughly one-quarter of Black Americans experience food insecurity, as compared with 10 percent of white non-Hispanic Americans, according to a report by Feeding America. In some parts of the rural American South, roughly two-thirds of Black people are experiencing food insecurity.

Solving this crisis will require a host of policy responses, including expanding SN eligibility and the child and earned-income tax credits, improving access to school lunch programs and building more affordable housing, which would ease some of the pressure on family budgets. In the meantime, you can help by donating to Feeding America and similar organizations. No one should go hungry in the richest nation on Earth.

ONLINE: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/06/opinion/communities-fund-feeding-america.html

Dec. 8

The Wall Street Journal on Trump and a path to citizenship for Dreamers

Donald Trump sat for an interview with NBC News that was released on Sunday, and most of it was focused on the usual media preoccupations of whether Mr. Trump will arrest his opponents or deport millions of illegal migrants. Readers can judge his comments.

As we read the transcript, however, the most interesting note was what the President-elect said about the so-called dreamers, who were brought here illegally as children but are now adults and still in legal limbo. Here’s the exchange:

NBC’s Kristen Welker: “What about dreamers, sir? . . . You said once back in 2017 they, quote, ‘Shouldn’t be very worried about being deported.’ Should they be worried now?”

Mr. Trump: “The dreamers are going to come later , and we have to do something about the dreamers because these are people that have been brought here at a very young age. And many of these are middle-aged people now. They don’t even speak the language of their country. And yes, we’re going to do something about the dreamers.”

Ms. Welker: “What does that mean? What are you going to do?”

Mr. Trump: “I will work with the Democrats on a plan. And if we can come up with a plan, but the Democrats have made it very, very difficult to do anything. Republicans are very open to the dreamers.”

That’s great to hear. If Mr. Trump is willing to deal on the dreamers, Democrats should shift from their first-term opposition to any immigration deal. The country will be better for it.

ONLINE: https://www.wsj.com/opinion/donald-trump-and-the-dreamers-deal-democrats-deportation-8e2124b2?mod=editorials_article_pos7

Dec. 8

The Guardian on the fall of Assad

Bashar al-Assad’s downfall came not with a bang but a whimper. The Syrian dictator reportedly fled his home in the wake of a blitzkrieg advance by a coalition of anti-government rebels. By Sunday morning he was gone – leaving armed groups as the country’s dominant political players. A spirit of anti-Assad sentiment surged across Syria, manifesting itself through displays of both celebration and defiance. The question now is whether this unleashed energy – brutally suppressed by fear and authoritarian control – will become a unifying force in building a new nation or, rather, a precursor to deeper divisions.

The fall of the House of Assad, which has ruled Syria for more than half a century, should be a warning to dictatorial regimes. Mr Assad’s departure underscores a broader truth: societies cannot indefinitely tolerate systemic abuses, such as state-sponsored propaganda, corruption and violence. The fish rots from the head down. Mr Assad’s Syrian state collapsed from within, having spent more than a decade pursuing a reign of terror that only fuelled the very unrest it sought to suppress. The regime’s collapse raises pressing questions about Syria’s future. With weak institutions and a frail civil society, the risk of disintegration looms large.

Syria’s prospects depend on both internal and external forces, and notably on Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham , a former al-Qaida offshoot turned moderate Islamist faction. Credited with Mr Assad’s overthrow, Mr Jolani drove the strategic shift from jihadism to national liberation. In 2021, he declared that he had no intention of waging war against the west, and for the past five years he has overseen a semi-technocratic government in Idlib province for 3 million people under Turkish protection. HTS has avoided extreme sharia interpretations, but remains designated a terrorist group. Critics say it is corrupt and intolerant of dissent. However, Mr Jolani’s outreach to tribes, minorities and former foes has bolstered his national legitimacy, while even Moscow – once Mr Assad’s protector – may engage to secure its military bases.

Mr Jolani relies on allies, including the Turkish-backed militia groups collectively called the Syrian National Army, which has a thuggish reputation. Re-elected on a pledge to return 3 million refugees, Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, seeks stability in Syria, but fears that US-backed Kurdish regions in Syria may stir autonomy demands at home. Israel sees an Islamist-led Damascus as a threat, but finds comfort in Hezbollah’s inability to defend the Assad regime, as it prioritises the defence of its Lebanese bases. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, with their financial resources, could aid Syria’s reconstruction, but their past support for Mr Assad complicates their role. Encouragingly, Arab leaders said they would seek to avoid reigniting a 13-year-old civil war after talks in Qatar.

Syria will never be the same. Ordinary Syrians have endured unimaginable horrors under the Assad regime. But they have written this chapter of history. Their newfound freedom is shadowed by the daunting task of rebuilding lives and infrastructure. A shared hope to avoid violent vendettas must guide efforts toward a just settlement. The Syrian people were often forsaken. In this moment of fragile hope, the world must not fail them again. A concerted international effort toward political stability, reconciliation and reconstruction is essential to ensure their sacrifices lead to a lasting peace.

ONLINE: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/dec/08/the-guardian-view-on-the-fall-of-assad-a-tumultuous-fragile-hope-in-syria

Dec. 10

The Boston Globe on holding Trump to presidential transition rules

Longstanding laws and norms govern how one presidential administration is supposed to hand off power to the next. They’re designed to ensure a smooth transfer while at the same time imposing some ethical guardrails during the interim period as incoming presidents make key personnel decisions.

President-elect Donald Trump is flouting some of those rules as he prepares to take office Jan. 20 — and by all accounts will continue flouting them, unless members of his own party start insisting.

Breaking with his predecessors, Trump is funding his transition with unlimited donations from undisclosed sources — dark money that could even include foreign donations. He’s avoided a customary arrangement that binds transition officials to ethics rules. And he tried to shield his nominees from undergoing the customary FBI background checks meant to ferret out misconduct or any red flags in their background.

Nothing about that serves the public interest.

Start with the money. To fund salaries, office space, and other expenses during their transition and inauguration, president-elects have relied on a combination of public support and disclosed private donations.

Trump’s transition has largely been funded by dark money interests, and unlike past presidents he hasn’t imposed any contribution limits or transparency requirements. The public doesn’t know who is funding the transition, or how much they’re giving.

But we can certainly guess: Trump’s deep-pocketed private-sector allies like Elon Musk, wannabe oligarchs for whom the lack of any limits or transparency amounts to an unprecedented opportunity to influence the incoming administration.

In other respects, Trump is ignoring the Presidential Transitions Act of 1963, a federal law that sets out the basic guidelines for one president to hand over power to the next. Among other things, it sets various deadlines, which presidents and candidates have always abided by in the past.

Last month the Trump transition team signed one of several required agreements with the Biden administration, blowing through the Oct. 1 legal deadline by nearly two months. That memorandum of understanding allows his transition to send landing teams of personnel to each federal agency to begin receiving briefings and other information to ease the Jan. 20, 2025 power transfer. He also begrudgingly signed an agreement allowing the normal FBI background checks into his nominees and appointees, after Senate Republicans insisted.

But Trump has refused to enter into other legally mandated agreements, including one that would release federal funding for office space, technology, and other transition needs. That’s because that pact includes strict ethics rules barring conflicts of interests by Trump and his team once sworn into office.

Instead, the Trump transition intends to implement his own ethics plan, something the law does not contemplate or allow.

Crucially, the agreements Trump refuses to sign would also provide for up to $7.2 million in federal funding for the transition in exchange for limits on outside donor contributions and disclosure requirements. By ignoring this rule, Trump can continue to raise unlimited funds to set up his administration while keeping the sources of that money under wraps.

The Biden administration and lawmakers must use every lever at their disposal to hold Trump and his incoming administration to the spirit and letter of the laws aimed at protecting the American people and national interests.

That begins with transparency from the General Services Administration, which oversees the transition, about whether Trump’s failure to follow the rule is affecting the ability of the agency to facilitate the transfer of power — a task important for ensuring the continual protection of Americans’ public health, safety, and security.

Senator Elizabeth Warren sent a letter last month to General Services Administrator Robin Carnahan asking how Trump’s refusal to follow the law has affected the transition.

Members of the Senate should also refuse Trump’s call to circumvent the confirmation requirements for members of his administration.

Trump has called for using recess appointments to put members of his cabinet who would otherwise need Senate confirmation in place without this vetting. Such appointments are meant to be used in emergency situations when the Senate is unable to convene to fill a cabinet-level vacancy – not to get around the Senate’s constitutional duty to advise and consent to these appointments.

Some Republicans, including Senator Susan Collins of Maine, have raised alarms at Trump’s approach.

“It is so important that we not shortchange the confirmation process for Cabinet appointments in particular,” Collins said in an interview with the Portland Press Herald. “I do not agree with the president that we should forgo background checks and have recess appointments where we would not have hearings on these very important appointments.”

But lawmakers should do more than disagree with Trump’s approach — they must refuse to play along.

ONLINE: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/12/10/opinion/trump-transition-rules-laws-transparency/

This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

Proposed site of shelter home at Holenfai village, Tengnoupal, Manipur on March 26, 2023

Imphal/Guwahati/New Delhi:

Five weeks before the Manipur ethnic conflict broke out in May 2023, a cabinet subcommittee comprising ministers from the three major communities visited three villages to assess the situation on “identification of immigrants/refugees from Myanmar”, from the report submitted by the subcommittee. It shows.

Tribal Affairs and Hills Minister Letpao Haokip, who is from the Kuki tribe, led the subcommittee, with Water Resources Minister Awangbo Newmai, a Naga, and Law Minister Basant Kumar Singh, a Meitei, as the two other members.

He visited three villages between March 26, 2023, and April 1, 2023, and met Myanmar citizens – including a member of parliament from the neighboring country – who were living in community halls under the supervision of village chiefs.

Kuki tribes in Manipur still follow the archaic hereditary chieftaincy system – responsible for power struggles between siblings and rapid growth of villages – which has also been abolished in neighboring Mizoram where homogeneous tribes live.

A community hall in Holenfai village, Tengnoupal, Manipur on March 26, 2023

The subcommittee never made any visit after clashes broke out on May 3, 2023, between the Meitei community and more than a dozen distinct tribes collectively known as the Kukis, who are influential in some hilly areas of Manipur.

Subcommittee chairman demanded separate administration

Letpao Haokip later joined the 10 Kuki-Zo MLAs who demanded a separate administration from Manipur. Kuki groups had raised the same demand in 2015, when nine people from their community were killed in police firing during a protest against three controversial bills introduced by the state government (then Congress party led by former chief minister Okram Ibobi Singh). It was done.

Meitei leaders say the claim by 10 Kuki-Zo MLAs and frontal groups that they had raised the demand for a separate administration only after the May 3 violence broke out was a blatant lie.

Manipur Cabinet Subcommittee members and other teams at Holenfai village, Tengnoupal, Manipur on March 26, 2023

By the time the subcommittee began its survey in late March 2023, tension was already rife in Kuki-dominated areas in southern Manipur, as the government had launched an eviction drive in K Songzang village of Churachandpur just a month earlier. The subcommittee’s visit to the three villages also coincided with sporadic protests by Kuki groups against what they called illegal eviction from the forests.

One NDTV report Citing preliminary documents filed by the subcommittee on June 21, 2023, it said more than 2,000 Myanmar nationals have settled inside Manipur and refused to move to designated shelters. They fled the war between the ruling junta and ethnic rebel groups claiming to be fighting for democracy.

Final copies of the subcommittee report with visuals of the trip, now accessed by NDTV, show that the three leaders repeatedly appealed to village heads to allow Myanmar nationals to stay in designated shelter camps once the structures were ready. Persuade.

Cabinet subcommittee at Gamphazol village in Chandel district, March 29, 2023

The subcommittee visited Holenfai village in Tengnoupal district on March 26, Gamphazol village in Chandel district on March 29 and Singhat in Churachandpur district on April 1, 2023.

“Mr. Letpao Haokip… highlighted the issue of illegal entry of Myanmar nationals into Indian territory, which has created apprehension among the general public as such immigrants are naturalized among the common native population due to similarity in culture and dialect. There is a high possibility of involvement. He further highlighted that although no such cases have been registered, it is suspected that many of them were already living in rented houses in the main Churachandpur city area. of Singhat The trip report said.

The report of the subcommittee’s visit to the first village, Holenfai, states, “Shri T. Basant Kumar Singh calls on all illegal immigrants to come forward and join the shelter homes, not to hide among the local people, in support of the humanitarian goodwill gesture extended by the Government. “Appeal to do.” He left on March 26, 2023 – said.

Border pillar at Gamphazol village

A unique problem came to light in Gamphazol village of Chandel district. The district commissioner said the IMB (India-Myanmar border) falling in Chandel district is “different from other neighboring districts” as it has a sparsely populated vast area of ​​forest spanning 60-75 km between border pillars number 72 and 49.

Conversation at Gumphazol Community Hall on March 29, 2023

The report said, “It was also suggested that it may not be possible for a single temporary shelter to serve all such immigrants in the region and proposed such temporary shelters at Gamphazol in the northern part and Somdal in the southern part. They went.” It was said about the visit of the subcommittee to this border village on March 29, 2023. The district commissioner said he found 628 “illegal immigrants” on the stretch of IMB falling in Chandel district, of which 250 were in Gamphazol village.

Subcommittee meets Myanmar MP ousted by junta

In Holenphai, the three ministers met Thammasei Haokip, a Myanmar member of parliament before the junta overthrew the government, who told the subcommittee that he would follow all rules and regulations while being a refugee in India and would return to Myanmar once the issue was resolved. “Finished/disposed of,” the report said.

“He (Thamsi Haokip) explained that because of the military junta in his country, he has come to Manipur, the closest state to the world’s largest democratic country, in the hope of providing humanitarian support at a time when citizens cannot live outside in Myanmar. He told the state government Appealed to provide identity card and permission/facility to earn livelihood. He also said that he will go back after the issue is resolved in Myanmar.

The foreign parliamentarian asked before the subcommittee to transfer Myanmar nationals detained as illegal immigrants to the proposed shelter homes, and urged them not to be treated as illegal immigrants because they fled the junta regime , where “civilians are being killed”.

Wooden planks were laid out ready to build houses in Gamphazol by Myanmar immigrants and refugees fleeing violence in their country

Gamphazol Village, Chandel

A wooden shelter built by Myanmar refugees at Gamphazol in Chandel district

Gamphazol Village, Chandel

An activist from the Kuki tribe, who claims to know the Myanmar MP personally, told NDTV that the foreign politician has deep links with the Kuki National Army (Burma), or KNA(B). Thammasei Haokip has taken refuge in a relatively safe, wooded area on the India-Myanmar border, the source said, adding that trusting people like Thammasei Haokip is a big move for the Meitei community because of the precedent set by another Myanmar. There will be a challenge. The original leader, Thanglienpau Guite.

The Manipur government has blamed uncontrolled entry of illegal immigrants from Myanmar as one of the factors responsible for the violence. It also cites “unnatural growth of villages” due to alleged settlement of illegal immigrants by village heads.

Example set: Myanmar MP turns leader of militant group

Meitei civil society groups are sensitive to any mention of leaders of Myanmar origin in the context of Manipur. Chief Minister N Biren Singh has said that this is due to sensitivity the way thanglianpau guite The “Myanmar-born” politician, who contested MP elections in his home country and who later became the chairman of militant group Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA) – was welcomed by the then Congress government when P Chidambaram was the Union Home Minister. United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government.

ZRA is a signatory to the controversial Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreement, which expired in February this year.

Cabinet subcommittee and other teams at the police station at Singhat in Churachandpur district on April 1, 2023

More than two dozen Kuki-Zo rebel groups fall under two major groups – the Kuki National Organization (KNO) and the United People’s Front (UPF). The two, representing others, have signed the SOO agreement, which states that rebels must live in designated camps with weapons kept in closed storage, to be regularly monitored.

Meitei leaders have alleged that the SHO groups have been working for years to strengthen themselves by taking advantage of the ceasefire until the time came to violently attack for a breakaway land. Geopolitical analysts have speculated that Kuki armed groups were used as mercenaries to fight Meitei and Naga militants operating along the India-Myanmar border.

In a statement in June 2023, Myanmar’s government-in-exile – a month after the Manipur conflict – asked its citizens “temporarily sheltered” in India to “refrain from any actions prejudicial to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India.” Said.”

The National Unity Government (NUG) in the statement asked Myanmar nationals taking “asylum” in India and their organizations to avoid unnecessary involvement in the politics and administrative activities of India, and asked them to live in harmony with the host communities. . NUG also appealed to Myanmar citizens not to get involved in drug trafficking.

Barrack inspection at Singhat, Churachandpur on April 1, 2023

The Manipur government announced on January 18, 2023 that it would form a subcommittee to identify “immigrants/refugees from Myanmar”; The state government announced the composition of the three-member panel on 16 February, and on 24 March ordered the police to investigate the number of immigrants from Myanmar in five districts – Tengnoupal, Chandel, Churachandpur, Pherzawal and Kamjong.

While the February 16 announcement referred to the subcommittee as a committee that would work on identifying “Myanmar immigrants/refugees” in the state, reports of the subcommittee’s visits referred to them as “illegal immigrants.” Was done.

Myanmar refugees in Mizoram

Neighboring state Mizoram has given shelter to more than 40,000 Myanmar refugees. Mizoram government sources told NDTV on November 10 that it has been almost three years since the coup in Myanmar, and in a small state like Mizoram, feeding and caring for all the displaced people and refugees remained a major challengeThere were also concerns over the increase in drug trafficking. Sources said the Mizoram government cannot thank the Central government enough for the huge help it is providing to the state in providing adequate resources to deal with the refugee crisis.

“The people of Mizoram are not immune to the tensions arising from all these efforts. There is growing discontent within our own community as well, especially among the intellectual class. Yes, we are welcoming them as brothers and sisters, but What are we getting back in return? We are getting medicines, this and that. So the frustration is growing,” the source told NDTV.

The Kuki tribes have criticized the Manipur government for not treating refugees from Myanmar humanely like in Mizoram.

There are many villages of Kuki tribes in the hills surrounding the Meitei dominated valley. More than 250 people were killed in the clashes and about 50,000 were internally displaced. The general category Meiteis want to be included in the Scheduled Tribe category, while the Kuki tribes want a separate administration from Manipur, citing discrimination against the Meiteis and unequal sharing of resources and power.